Atari name originated from the Japanese game go

[KAZ]

I just thought it was interesting, since I was "trying" learn the game go over the weekend. In my opinion the game is really hard to learn, but in the manual for the game, it mentions about "Atari".

 

It is a move where you can take out a whole series of your opponent's stones all at once (I think).

 

The game ends (this is still a little new to me) when you gain more territory than your opponent, but I have yet to understand when the game ends.

 

It ends based on who has the most points? Or is it when you've exhausted all the stones? Or when your opponent cannot move without making a "suicidal" move.

 

I think I'll stick to easy chess for a while.

 

I was looking on the Atariage site for references to Go, but I didn't find any right away, but I'm sure others have brought this topic up before someplace.

 

Even Changgi, Shogi, and Xianggi are easier than go. Western cultures are not accustomed to placing pieces on intersections of lines, however.

So Shogi would be a game that's easier to pick up on.

 

I have a feeling that chess not only originated in China, but that chess was a strange later mutation of go (probably an easier way to play go).

 

Go has a Changgi feel to it, as far as the placing on intersections. Of course I know the two are played very differently.

 

Chess as we know it originated in India, but it seemed to first have migrated from China, where the game was less like orthodox chess.

 

But Chinese chess is really just their chess, it can't be considered a "variant" persay.

 

Well I'm an enthusastic fan of chess history. Anyone ever try to play "Chaturanga?" It is quite a slow moving way that chess used to be played, with elephants and counsellors instead of Bishops and Queens respectively.

[NovaXpress]

So what do you think of the name of Nolan Bushnell's next company: Sente?

[KAZ]

I liked when I read this on sumsite:

 

Sometimes I have this problem, where I've been very focused and become deeply involved in a game of Go, which then refuses to vacate my mind even when I'm done playing. My brain just keeps processing potential permutations of the game, and they continue to appear right before my eyes. It often carries on into my sleep and dreams, and seeing Go patterns in other things, sometimes up to a day or so after playing. Frankly, it's disruptive until it goes away, but I suspect I must be a better player for it.

 

 

Go corrupt your brain from go, sleep well have a nice day

People having nightmares about go fractals, funny stuff.

[spacecadet]

I was looking on the Atariage site for references to Go, but I didn't find any right away, but I'm sure others have brought this topic up before someplace.

 

It's in the FAQ

 

"Atari" is used in general conversation in Japan too, though. Not that often, but you do hear it sometimes, often when playing other games and one person wants to say something like "I win". ("Yatta" is more general-purpose and so more common, but you'd hear someone say "atari!" if they just made a move that killed or cornered you.)

 

It's kinda like how sometimes you hear people say "check-mate" in general conversation here.

[128bytes]

My avatar is an "atari" from Go...

[Mindfield]

Anyone find it kind of ironic that Nolan's first two companies eventually ended up in similar places?

 

Atari -> Warner Communications -> Split between Atari Computers (Atari Inc.) and Atari Coin-Ops (Atari Games)

Atari Games -> Midway

Sente -> Bally -> Midway

[Zach]

I was looking on the Atariage site for references to Go, but I didn't find any right away, but I'm sure others have brought this topic up before someplace.

 

You're right. It has been discussed at least a couple times before in these forums. Of course it's a difficult word to search for because "go" means two things.

 

http://www.atariage.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=28084

 

http://www.atariage.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=33927

 

Glad someone else around here has heard of Xiangqi. I prefer it to Western Chess.

[Robert M]

I love the game Go. It is an incredible game. There are a number of variations on the rules which can make learning it difficult. Here is my favorite set of rules since it is the shortest set of rules I have found. This is the set of rules I used to learn the game. I hope you find them useful.

 

Rules for Go:

1. Go is played on a 19x19 square grid of points. You place stones on the intersections, not inside the squares formed by the lines. As a beginner I recommend first playing on a 7x7 board, then 11x11 and so on until you are comfortable enough to try 19x19.

 

2. Each point on the grid may be colored black, white, or empty.

 

3. Starting with an empty grid, the players alternate turns, starting with black.

 

4. A turn is either a pass; or a move THAT DOES NOT REPEAT AN EARLIER GRID COLORING (that last bit is critical to avoid an infinite loop).

 

5. A move consists of coloring an empty point one's own color; then clearing the opponent color, and then clearing one's own color. Note the order of clearing. It is critical.

 

6. Clearing a color is the process of emptying all points of that color which don't reach a point colored empty.

 

6a. A point P is said to reach empty, if a path of vertically or horizontally connected (NOT DIAGONALLY!) points of P's color to a space colored empty.

 

6b. Note: When you clear a color. First you find all the points that do not reach empty, and then you remove them all at once. You don't find one point that doesn't clear and remove it and then test another. All points that don't clear are removed simultaneously. First for the player whose turn it is not, and then for the player whose turn it is.

 

7. The game ends after two consecutive passes.

 

8. A player's score is the number of points of her color, plus the number of empty points that only reach her color. (You can also include all of you opponents pieces removed from the board from the clearing process, but that is optional)

 

9. The player with the higher score is the winner. A tie score is a tie game.

 

--------------

Some examples can make these rules more clear:

Given that:

+ is empty

w is white

b is black



++++++++

++b+++++

+bwA++++

++b+++++

++++++++



Above: If black colors the point marked A as black, then the w point in the middle can not clear to empty and it is removed from the board.



++++++++

++b+++++

+bAb++++

++b+++++

++++++++



If white colors the point marked A. All the b points clear to empty, but the w point at A does not and it is removed.  The white player's move did nothing, and if you are counted captured stones, then it gave black an extra point.



++++++++

++bw++++

+bwAw+++

++bw++++

++++++++



If black colors the point marked A, then the w space surrounded by b spaces will not clear and that point is captured.   The newly placed b will clear however because the w space was captured.   The white player CAN NOT place their next piece where the last one was just captured because that would return the board back to the same state it had at the start of black'c previous turn.   White must place a piece somewhere else.  Then the next turn, (if black did not protect that space) the white player may place at the captured point and capture the black at A placed 2 turns ago.  (See rule 4 above)



++++++++

++bbb+++

+bwwwb++

++bbwb++

++++A+++



The same principles for capture apply to connected points of one color of any size.  If black colors the space marked A, then all 4 w spaces are captures and removed from the board.   



An obvious question at this point may be: "Is there any way to make pieces permanently safe from capture and thereby cement the capture of territory needed to win the game?"



The answer is yes!  You make a collection of points safe from capture by having the group contain two or more "eyes".    An eye is an empty point wholly surrounded by a connected set of points all of one color.   Here is a picture of region with 2 eyes.



+wwww+++

wbbbbbww+

wbAbBbbbw

wbbwbbwww

+wwwww++



the points marked A and B above are empty and therefore they are eyes.   The white player has surrounded the black region, but the region can clear to either eye, so it is not captured by white.   If white places a piece on A, then the black region clears to B and the white piece at A is removed.   The opposite happens if white places at B.   the black region is immune to attack as long as it has 2 or more eyes.



So the goal in GO  is to create regions with 2 eyes, and then expand them as far as possible to capture territory.  Meanwhile you must block you opponent from doing the same as much as possible.   Eventually the board will be filled by regions of immune color, and both players will have to pass and the game will end.  

Enjoy!

[Zach]

This is as good a time as any to show off my latest project. Assuming I work out some kinks, you'll see more in the homebrew forum. Until then, here's a teaser:

[Joey Kay]

Did anyone see that episode of "Who Wants to be a Millionaire" when they asked what the word "Atari" meant?

 

Cheers!

 

Joey

[ZylonBane]

Anyone find it kind of ironic that Nolan's first two companies eventually ended up in similar places?

What's ironic about it? Perhaps you mean "fitting" or "apropos", both of which are pretty much the opposite of ironic.

[Bryan]

Anyone find it kind of ironic that Nolan's first two companies eventually ended up in similar places?

What's ironic about it? Perhaps you mean "fitting" or "apropos", both of which are pretty much the opposite of ironic.

 

I think he means the opposite: that it was unlikely they would both end up in the same place (although they were the same type of company).

 

-Bry

[NovaXpress]

It's not ironic. Midway was buying up every developer they could (Williams, Sega) so the fact that any two particular companies would pass through their hands isn't surprizing.

 

Not many people really understand what irony means, I blame Alanis Morissette who confused "ironic events" with "bummers."

[Mindfield]

I meant "ironic" simply because it seemed like even after Nolan left Atari with his unfortunate contract clause stating that he could never work in the same field, he still ultimately couldn't escape it even when he was trying. (Granted, Sente Technologies was a similar field, but "similar" didn't violate the clause)

 

It certainly is apropos in the end, but that doesn't mean it still isn't ironic. :-)

[NovaXpress]

Nolan Bushnell didn't start Sente until his no-compete clause expired. Sente was in the video game business, of course they would have violated the clause.

 

And no, it's still not ironic at all.